Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.

Congress can expel its own members for any reason at all with a 2/3 vote in either house (of course, the House can only expel House members, and the Senate can only expel Senate members). But why would you expel someone based on mere words that they used?

If the people have a problem with him, they can vote him out of office. But when you start calling for the expulsion of members for mere words (no threats, criminal activity, etc.), we have a problem.

As tempting as that would be, I think idiots like him and those in the "The Squad" should be allowed to remain until they are voted out. Otherwise, it is a violation of freedom of speech/expression, plus it lets people know that there are people who think like they do in this country, and they can be exposed for the low-lifes they are.

A congressperson cannot be impeached -- but they can be expelled. Congress has used its expulsion power a total of 15 times. Expulsion requires a two-thirds vote.

He has made extremely controversial comments apparently in support of white supremacy, as well as recent comments denying abortions to women even in the case of rape or incest.

The Republican Party, to their credit, have distanced themselves from Mr. King.

I don't think it's that controversial. On a national level, sure. But in Iowa who he represents the heartbeat bill passed on a normal party line vote with only a few Republicans crossing the aisle. I mean, in the sense that the Democrat leaning voters disagree with his comments it's controversial. It's not controversial in that he's out in far right field though.

Republicans aren't really distancing themselves from the substance of his argument as much as the presentation. They're in effect saying he should have said what he said with less bluntness as it doesn't put the best light on their beliefs. Nonetheless Iowa's Republican representatives overwhelmingly agree with him as they overwhelmingly voted on a bill that says the same thing. Republicans in more liberal states probably disagree but that's just because their constituents are more liberal. Republicans in Iowa aren't worried about a voter revolt over not including a exemption for an underage girl who is raped by her father. They are worried about not being perceived as pro-life enough by their constituents. In other words, they're motivated more by the more real threat of being unseated in the primary by a more conservative candidate who agrees with Steve King even if on a personal level they do not than they are worried about alienating less conservative Iowans being offended by Steve King and changing their vote to a Democratic candidate.

It is up to his district in Iowa to decide his fate. While most people around the US clearly view him as a bigoted racist, the people in his district for the last 18 years seem to think he represents them and their views very well.

Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.